Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 15 July 2005 09:25 pm, Michael Marineau wrote:
> 

>>
>>Does the risk of abuse outweigh the potential usefulness that much?  My
>>vote would be to do more of this sort of thing.  Reducing the
>>oppertunity for users to shoot themselves in the foot would be good.
> 
> 
> err i dont see what this topic has to do with baselayout's problems 
> with /etc/profile.d functionality
> 
> we could care less what users do with /etc/profile.d ... the point is that 
> *only* users should use /etc/profile.d ... we dont want random Gentoo 
> developer Foo installing some Bar.sh into /etc/profile.d with package 
> app-crap/FooBar
> -mike

I just ment that by providing profile.d (and similar things) would let
users customize
their profile without having to edit a gentoo installed file, making
upgrades a bit
easier.  To prevent abuse perhaps portage could enforce a blacklist of
locations that
are reserved for users. (/root and /usr/local could also be
blacklisted).  But on the other
hand profile.d isn't that big of an issue as  users won't blow away
their /etc/profile as long
as they use etc-update properly.

-- 
Michael Marineau
marineam@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux Developer
Oregon State University